HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, NHL revenues, relocation and expansion.

Gary Bettman on Flames / Bruins TV Broadcast asks City of Calgary for new Arena

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-16-2017, 10:34 AM
  #26
Slot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 2,408
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by varano View Post
Truthfully, Why is Bettman being asked that question?

Outside of Calgary, I've never seen him involved in a process that puts pressure on a city to build a new building.

Maybe he should focus on other markets like NYI, ARI, etc.
My sarcasm meter may be broken but Bettman has been involved in several arena negotiations (ultimatums) including in Arizona not 3 weeks ago.

Slot is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2017, 10:34 AM
  #27
jason2020
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,614
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by powerstuck View Post
In Arizona, NHL is asking for 57% of public funding.

They propose $170M from team owner, $170M from state and $55M (or more) from the city. The $55M is mainly for land (so city offers for free or buys land for the team) and surrounding infrastructure.

Now, if you ask me, that is a lot asking from public, which pay more than 50% of the building. If they are asking that in AZ, what stops them for asking for at least a similar deal in Calgary ?
The Calgary one would cost $900 million now as for public money only rumors at this point but many claim $700 million would be public money city $200 million and the other $500 million would be split between Alberta and the feds and that's where the issue is as the feds have said they won't fund any sports arenas or stadiums.

jason2020 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2017, 11:22 AM
  #28
tony d
Irish Spring Soap
 
tony d's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Behind A Tree
Country: Canada
Posts: 57,480
vCash: 500
A new arena is needed big time for Calgary, just don't think public funds should be used to build a sports arena.

__________________


Celebrating 10 yrs. at hfboards today. Thanks everyone for making the past decade so memorable. Here's to 10 more years.
tony d is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2017, 12:13 PM
  #29
cutchemist42
Registered User
 
cutchemist42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,087
vCash: 500
A new arena is maybe needed, but NHL governors should shut up and build themselves.

cutchemist42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2017, 01:30 PM
  #30
SCBlueLiner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 177
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by powerstuck View Post
Que the Flames to Seattle/Portland rumors.

(Would have said Quebec, but conference imbalance is preventing that).
The Hamilton Flames.

Has a nice ring to it.

SCBlueLiner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2017, 01:44 PM
  #31
Mightygoose
Registered User
 
Mightygoose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Ajax, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,563
vCash: 500
I sense for both the city and the Flames talks are intentionally quiet.

Still believe this is just a song and dance until the city officaly bids for the 2026 games and then all of the sudden they'll be on the same page.

Bettman's stance was much softer than the one to Arizona. None of this 'can not and will not' play in the Saddledome. I have a feeling he's breifed on the plan, can't say it, not worth threatening the city so he's just going with the comparison to Edmonton.

Mightygoose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2017, 01:52 PM
  #32
jason2020
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,614
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mightygoose View Post
I sense for both the city and the Flames talks are intentionally quiet.

Still believe this is just a song and dance until the city officaly bids for the 2026 games and then all of the sudden they'll be on the same page.

Bettman's stance was much softer than the one to Arizona. None of this 'can not and will not' play in the Saddledome. I have a feeling he's breifed on the plan, can't say it, not worth threatening the city so he's just going with the comparison to Edmonton.
My guess is the stadium etc gets dropped form it and they just get the rink for around $400 million.

jason2020 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2017, 01:53 PM
  #33
jason2020
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,614
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SCBlueLiner View Post
The Hamilton Flames.

Has a nice ring to it.
Hamilton would have the same issue no public money.

jason2020 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2017, 01:59 PM
  #34
SCBlueLiner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 177
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jason2020 View Post
Hamilton would have the same issue no public money.
It was sarcasm. Somebody mentioned Canada losing another team to the U.S. I was simply pointing out the mindblowing possibility that Calgary refusing to be held up for a new building could result in something that other Canadians have been clamoring for, a team in Hamilton. I agree that is unlikely, hence the sarcasm.

SCBlueLiner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2017, 02:52 PM
  #35
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 52,244
vCash: 1020
Quote:
Originally Posted by SCBlueLiner View Post
It was sarcasm. Somebody mentioned Canada losing another team to the U.S. I was simply pointing out the mindblowing possibility that Calgary refusing to be held up for a new building could result in something that other Canadians have been clamoring for...
... the Flambés?

tarheelhockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2017, 08:30 PM
  #36
Jonas1235
Registered User
 
Jonas1235's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,226
vCash: 500
I live in Calgary and the people who run the city right now are not interested at all in big spending for anything other than public transit.

They are sitting on their hands just like Quebec City did. We're a Canadian city that loves hockey, so we'll let this slide forever.

If Calgary Flames ownership gets constant no's from city council and Seattle offers them a sweetheart lease, then why wouldn't they relocate? It's about money. I'd put right now 10% chance the Calgary Flames play somewhere else in 5 years. Goes up every year a shovel isn't in the ground.

Jonas1235 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2017, 11:38 PM
  #37
Syckle78
Registered User
 
Syckle78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Redford, MI
Country: Belgium
Posts: 9,397
vCash: 712
Quote:
Originally Posted by cutchemist42 View Post
A new arena is maybe needed, but NHL governors should shut up and build themselves.
Yea I'm at the other end of the spectrum on this. If a city, state,province what have you wants to have a nice building that houses a sports team and brings in other entertainment year round for the populace to enjoy then I don't have any issue with the locals helping to foot the bill. Most local err all governments just **** away tax money anyway at least there's something tangible people can enjoy out of these dollars.

Syckle78 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2017, 01:29 AM
  #38
Shawa666
Registered User
 
Shawa666's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Québec, Qc, Ca
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,581
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
... the Flambés?
Feux de pailles.

Shawa666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2017, 08:49 AM
  #39
jason2020
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,614
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonas1235 View Post
I live in Calgary and the people who run the city right now are not interested at all in big spending for anything other than public transit.

They are sitting on their hands just like Quebec City did. We're a Canadian city that loves hockey, so we'll let this slide forever.

If Calgary Flames ownership gets constant no's from city council and Seattle offers them a sweetheart lease, then why wouldn't they relocate? It's about money. I'd put right now 10% chance the Calgary Flames play somewhere else in 5 years. Goes up every year a shovel isn't in the ground.
Its a pr nightmare for the city if they hand over $400 million many will say that money should have gone to roads etc.

jason2020 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2017, 08:50 AM
  #40
CorbeauNoir
Registered User
 
CorbeauNoir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 680
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Syckle78 View Post
Yea I'm at the other end of the spectrum on this. If a city, state,province what have you wants to have a nice building that houses a sports team and brings in other entertainment year round for the populace to enjoy then I don't have any issue with the locals helping to foot the bill. Most local err all governments just **** away tax money anyway at least there's something tangible people can enjoy out of these dollars.
The city isn't interested though, at least not in the proposal as it stands. As was mentioned a few posts up, Calgary's main priority as far as infrastructure is concerned is the LRT extention. CalgaryNext is something entirely pushed by the owners. If it was something the city wanted it'd be under construction right now.


Last edited by CorbeauNoir: 03-17-2017 at 09:23 AM.
CorbeauNoir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2017, 09:18 AM
  #41
CorbeauNoir
Registered User
 
CorbeauNoir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 680
vCash: 500
Right on cue...

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...lars-1.4029227

Quote:
Mayor Naheed Nenshi says Calgarians have been loud and clear in their opposition to using public dollars to finance a new arena for the Flames, and to the NHL commissioner jumping into the debate.

"The calls to our office, the emails, the comments have been, I would say, 99.999997 per cent saying please Mr. Bettman stay out of it and no, there should be no public money for this," said Nenshi.

CorbeauNoir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2017, 09:25 AM
  #42
powerstuck
Nordiques Hopes Lies
 
powerstuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Town NHL hates !
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,443
vCash: 500
Historically what was/is the oldest arena hockey team played out of ?

MSG will be up there but it just got renovated big time, so lets exclude that one.

I am asking because while there is no urgency to build it today, if they are talking about it, it's because it needs to be done.

What you guys say it's that it is not in city's plans to do anything about it. I doubt the province would want to get involved because IIRC they did not in Edmonton...

So 5 or 10 years down the road, the building will be 40+ years. What's most likely to happen ?

powerstuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2017, 09:30 AM
  #43
TheBeastCoast
Registered User
 
TheBeastCoast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Dartmouth,NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,882
vCash: 500


Publicly funded stadiums are pretty much never a good idea for the actual community no matter how much Bettman says it will boost economies. If he wants a new arena in Calgary get the owners to pony up.

TheBeastCoast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2017, 11:34 AM
  #44
DoyleG
Mr. Reality
 
DoyleG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: YEG--->YYJ
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,295
vCash: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by jason2020 View Post
Its a pr nightmare for the city if they hand over $400 million many will say that money should have gone to roads etc.
Yet the people who complain that money needs to go to roads are a little silent when roads are being dug up for transit projects.

The city response might be good PR, but bad economics. Deferring projects on that basis only adds to the cost the taxpayers will pay in the future when they have little choice.

DoyleG is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2017, 11:56 AM
  #45
Jonas1235
Registered User
 
Jonas1235's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,226
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBeastCoast View Post


Publicly funded stadiums are pretty much never a good idea for the actual community no matter how much Bettman says it will boost economies. If he wants a new arena in Calgary get the owners to pony up.
the owners don't have any money. I'm sure most of the inventors are involved with oil, the team lost huge amounts of money pre-2004 and since 2004, I'd say they've probably made a modest profit.

They do not have 400 million. I guarantee you this.

There's a 1 percent chance a building in CGY is built without public money.

Jonas1235 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2017, 12:01 PM
  #46
jason2020
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,614
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoyleG View Post
Yet the people who complain that money needs to go to roads are a little silent when roads are being dug up for transit projects.

The city response might be good PR, but bad economics. Deferring projects on that basis only adds to the cost the taxpayers will pay in the future when they have little choice.
That's happening in Ottawa now for years council said no we will worry about it down the road now its all going to be done at once Lrt/upgrading roads/new library etc were talking billions.

jason2020 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2017, 12:46 PM
  #47
CorbeauNoir
Registered User
 
CorbeauNoir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 680
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonas1235 View Post
If Calgary Flames ownership gets constant no's from city council and Seattle offers them a sweetheart lease, then why wouldn't they relocate? It's about money. I'd put right now 10% chance the Calgary Flames play somewhere else in 5 years. Goes up every year a shovel isn't in the ground.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonas1235 View Post
the owners don't have any money. I'm sure most of the inventors are involved with oil, the team lost huge amounts of money pre-2004 and since 2004, I'd say they've probably made a modest profit.
http://www.bnn.ca/he-doesn-t-follow-...sands-1.692535

So Flames co-owner Murray Edwards has the financial werewithal and confidence in a depressed oil economy to spend 8.5 BILLION dollars to buy up assets in Shell just a couple of weeks ago, but when it comes to the new arena he's suddenly broke and desperate to listen to Seattle for relocation offers? Get real.

It's such a transparent bluff on the part of the owners that I'm stunned there are actually still people out there who believe it. Thankfully most people here seem to see it for exactly what it is.

CorbeauNoir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2017, 12:56 PM
  #48
WaveRaven
Registered User
 
WaveRaven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: The Peg
Posts: 1,446
vCash: 109
Calgary what are you thinking ?

Billionaires need subsidies ya know and why not have the average tax payer pay it, otherwise how do pay Johnny Hockey 8 Million a year while keeping your billions ?

WaveRaven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2017, 12:57 PM
  #49
TheBeastCoast
Registered User
 
TheBeastCoast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Dartmouth,NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,882
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorbeauNoir View Post
http://www.bnn.ca/he-doesn-t-follow-...sands-1.692535

So Flames co-owner Murray Edwards has the financial werewithal and confidence in a depressed oil economy to spend 8.5 BILLION dollars to buy up assets in Shell just a couple of weeks ago, but when it comes to the new arena he's suddenly broke and desperate to listen to Seattle for relocation offers? Get real.

It's such a transparent bluff on the part of the owners that I'm stunned there are actually still people out there who believe it. Thankfully most people here seem to see it for exactly what it is.
Yeah it never ceases to amaze me the people that buy into the poor owner shtick every single time the wealthy owner is trying to get the city/government to hand over a fortune to build them a new toy. Calgary probably does need a new stadium but stadiums that are publicly funded have been proven to be absolutely awful investments of tax payer money.

TheBeastCoast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2017, 01:01 PM
  #50
powerstuck
Nordiques Hopes Lies
 
powerstuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Town NHL hates !
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,443
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorbeauNoir View Post
http://www.bnn.ca/he-doesn-t-follow-...sands-1.692535

So Flames co-owner Murray Edwards has the financial werewithal and confidence in a depressed oil economy to spend 8.5 BILLION dollars to buy up assets in Shell just a couple of weeks ago, but when it comes to the new arena he's suddenly broke and desperate to listen to Seattle for relocation offers? Get real.

It's such a transparent bluff on the part of the owners that I'm stunned there are actually still people out there who believe it. Thankfully most people here seem to see it for exactly what it is.
So you are saying that lets say in 5 years Flames owners are in front of these two choices :

a) Pay $400M to build their own arena in Calgary
b) Move to Seattle in a brand new arena and get some incentive doing so

I know what I would chose.

powerstuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:06 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2017 All Rights Reserved.